Note Tiger and Rory are on record as favoring the change, but a lot of vitriol coming from the rank-and-file.
What doesn’t make sense to me is quotes like this:
Rickie Fowler is not a fan of the ruling bodies making any change to the ball at any level. “There are other ways of going about this,” he said, adding that they are “20 years too late” on the issue.
So if they had rolled things back 20 years ago he would have been totally in favor of it. Gotcha.
Very little acknowledgement on the fan forums in question of the need for most championship courses to keep pushing their tees back, and I saw someone who said that get savagely flamed. But how much farther can they keep pushing them? Augusta National has pretty much hit its limits now, and you risk ruining the character of a given hole by going too far back (such concerns were raised about the lengthening of the par 5 13th there in April). Rory averaged 326 this past season (overall PGA average is almost exactly 300 yards note): what would these venues need to do if someone reaches a 340 average, w/ the tour average hitting 320?
Yeah, sure, I agree that the golf PTB should have nipped this in the bud years ago, but better late than never. There is concern however that, since it will be a blanket rollback, it might affect amateurs significantly, tho I’ve seen “-15 yards for the big Tour boppers, -10 for the average pro, -5 for the typical hacker” bandied about.
I had the solution to this (and club technology) 20 years ago. Start building golf courses that you need strategy and technique to do well on. Modify existing courses for the same purposes and stop with the distance is king design. Add water and bunkers that get in the players’ way. Doglegs that do better with a long iron off the tee instead of a driver. Narrow spots on the fairway. Downhill slopes to the green from a pitching/chipping distance. Etc. Golf should be a game of skill, not power.
It’s better than making a par 5 six hundred yards long and a par 4 five hundred yards long. The scores are ridiculous. I was surfing last weekend and found a match where half a dozen players were 20 or more strokes under par. I think the leader was -25.
Ever played a Stanley Thompson course? That’s exactly how they’re designed.
On one of my favourite Thompson courses, one hole requires you to hit to about 175 yards out—then you turn 90-degrees right, and it’s still 200 yards to the hole. You cannot cut the corner because of the tall trees. The next hole is a deceptive-looking par-3, at about 200 yards, but with a wickedly-sloping green that will put you where you don’t want to be if you don’t hit it just right. The hole after that puts a creek about 200 yards out. A pro would have no problem hitting past it; your average duffer would lose the ball in the creek every time. As I have, many times. I’ve learned to lay up before it.
Thompson courses require skill. Power helps, but it’s not the only way to play a Thompson course.
One of my favorite holes ever was on a executive 9. 160 yds to the hole and if you were short you were in a creek and long you were OB onto a road past a fence. I played a 6 iron because you had to hit the green and made it stick.
Hah… that reminds me of my cagey strategy in college. One of the holes on the campus golf course was pretty long and straight, and had a slight downhill grade.
So rather than tee up and try and boom it with my driver, I found that I could usually beat my buddies on that hole by taking out my 3 iron (I inherited the clubs from my grandfather) and just whack it flat along the ground and letting it roll near the green. Totally not exactly the “accepted” way to tee off, but it worked- I could usually get really close to the green in one stroke this way, even though it was ugly as sin.
When I read about this, my first thought was the folly of having the same rules for pros and ams. I’ve long thought that stupid - both in terms of equipment and rules. I think the article mentioned aluminum baseball bats… What would be the harm in having one class of balls for sanctioned competitions, and another class for everyone else?
My second thought was, I wonder if the formulation of the balls will be such that there is more of a yardage drop off for pros with fast swing speeds, and less for ams with slower swings. The article mentioned testing balls with swing speeds of 125 MPH. Unless you were the equivalent of a college player, no am swings anywhere near that fast. Especially no am over 50.
I’m 63. I used to be a long hitter (tho not crazy long). Over just the past 2 years I’ve lost at least 10 yds per club. Kinda bothersome, but no big deal. My clubs are from when I was 10-15 years younger and fitter. I figure when I retire in a couple of years I’ll treat my self and get fitted for a new set of old man clubs to take me to the grave.
IMO, there is a big conflict of interest in the USGA. I think the Board of Directors are mostly made up from members of Country clubs that are around 100 yrs old (or older). Those courses are landlocked and becoming obsolete for major championships and elite amateur events. The USGA wheels have got their knickers in a knot.
The guy (John Spitzer) that is in charge of equipment (whatever that means) says that
“Equipment plays a very very small role in this. The increases that we see at the PGA Tour level are almost entirely due to the player himself.”
